<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>1996 (1) TMI 73 - MADHYA PRADESH High Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=18469</link>
    <description>The High Court upheld the Commissioner&#039;s decisions regarding investment allowance, deduction u/s 80J, and carry forward of unabsorbed depreciation and relief under section 80J. It ruled in favor of the Revenue, emphasizing the need for accurate interpretation of legal provisions and comprehensive investigation in tax assessments. The Tribunal&#039;s allowance of investment allowance on the cold storage plant was overturned due to the plant not qualifying as a manufacturing unit under the Income-tax Act. The High Court supported the entitlement of the ice plant for investment allowance, despite challenges in segregating investments for the combined units.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 16 Jan 1996 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 01 Oct 2009 11:54:19 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=57469" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1996 (1) TMI 73 - MADHYA PRADESH High Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=18469</link>
      <description>The High Court upheld the Commissioner&#039;s decisions regarding investment allowance, deduction u/s 80J, and carry forward of unabsorbed depreciation and relief under section 80J. It ruled in favor of the Revenue, emphasizing the need for accurate interpretation of legal provisions and comprehensive investigation in tax assessments. The Tribunal&#039;s allowance of investment allowance on the cold storage plant was overturned due to the plant not qualifying as a manufacturing unit under the Income-tax Act. The High Court supported the entitlement of the ice plant for investment allowance, despite challenges in segregating investments for the combined units.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 16 Jan 1996 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=18469</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>